Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Neil Peart down on band's 70s work
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedNeil Peart down on band's 70s work

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 56789>
Author
Message
werbinox View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: March 29 2014
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2014 at 21:45
I find this to be a too common sentiment with most of the musicians I have known, especially "prog" musicians. They are the harshest critics of their own work, and many of them seemingly cant stand the works of their past that we all know and love. I have just come to accept that as part of the deal. They are too close to the work to begin with, and will never be able to hear it as a fan does. That is kind of sad in a way. As a "father" of, say, Hemishperes, Neal will never be able to "date her" as I have...he will never know the joy of discovering that album as a bolt from the blue as I did. Also, Ive noticed all of my musical heroes are fairly cracked about some subject or other, and figure, well, if thinking that way helped you to create such and such, so be it. So I smile yet again when another genius disses his own work, and think, well, whatever you gotta think to go creating, so be it. He's earned his right to think such things. And artists are often the worst points of reference when it comes to evaluating their work.
Back to Top
Dellinger View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12724
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2014 at 22:43
Fortunatley Yes never got this idea after their success with 90125 and "Owner of a Lonley Heart", otherwise we might never have heard them play their 70's music live again, nor have heard them doing any attempt at prog again after that (which, though they have not been able to repeat their masterpiece albums from the 70's, they have managed some really nice prog songs since).
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17497
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2014 at 09:12
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

No, they, that is his tragedies, are not special.  But it can serve to put his comments in perspective if ermmm one is prepared to allow that to the artist rather than cast a prejudiced microscope to all their statements.  

I still fail to understand why there is any obligation for Peart to like all his records.  The artist made a record at a certain point of time in his career. The listener can either buy it and like it for what it is or not, it is his choice.  If the artist's opinion of his own work causes so much grief, don't buy it, simple.  The loss is ultimately yours, not Neil Peart's. 
 
Weird ... so if I have something happen, and I write it here, then the loss is yours, much more than mine?
 
Hmmmmmm ....
 
Maybe I need to see Frank Capra movies again!
 
What we're doing is saying that because he is famous, his "tragedies" are more important to you and I as a listener and buyer of his records, than life itself. I'm sorry, but that is a very gross mis-interpretation of "fame" and "fortune", and in the end, its sense is scary. You are not as important as him, and that is selfish and self-righteous, and not worth the discussion any more.
 
If my child died, it would be more important than Neil Peart's tragedy or tragedies? Simply because he wrote a song about it, and I only told you about it? 


Edited by moshkito - March 31 2014 at 09:18
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Jellybeantiger View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2008
Location: Melbourne,Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 17
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2014 at 09:23
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

I hear you John. 

I doubt he intended to insult anyone, Neil seems like a nice chap.  But there is sort of an arrogance that develops over time (more pronounced in Waters) where the older, wiser, matured artist looks down his nose with a sneer at the youthful days.  It may make perfect sense to these guys who are now all businessmen, but not to me. 

I give Rush a lot of credit for the constant pursuit of refinement and the seriousness with which they took their career, I really do.  But it's just always been this way for me.....with very few exceptions, the spark is captured early in rock music....it is a young person's game in my opinion.  For me as a fan, it's about the fun and energy, not the precision of the production or the social conscience of their latest lyric.  All about the spark in the eye, the fire in the belly. 


Spot on mate.
I do agree Moving Pictures is their starting point but imo the next best in the catalog is before that album ,not after even though I love Signals.

I prefer The Tubes first three albums also.
P.S. why aren't The Tubes listed on Prog Archives btw?
Trying to spread the good prog to mud eared Aussies.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2014 at 10:10
Originally posted by moshkito moshkito wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

No, they, that is his tragedies, are not special.  But it can serve to put his comments in perspective if ermmm one is prepared to allow that to the artist rather than cast a prejudiced microscope to all their statements.  

I still fail to understand why there is any obligation for Peart to like all his records.  The artist made a record at a certain point of time in his career. The listener can either buy it and like it for what it is or not, it is his choice.  If the artist's opinion of his own work causes so much grief, don't buy it, simple.  The loss is ultimately yours, not Neil Peart's. 
 
Weird ... so if I have something happen, and I write it here, then the loss is yours, much more than mine?
 
Hmmmmmm ....
 
Maybe I need to see Frank Capra movies again!
 
What we're doing is saying that because he is famous, his "tragedies" are more important to you and I as a listener and buyer of his records, than life itself. I'm sorry, but that is a very gross mis-interpretation of "fame" and "fortune", and in the end, its sense is scary. You are not as important as him, and that is selfish and self-righteous, and not worth the discussion any more.
 
If my child died, it would be more important than Neil Peart's tragedy or tragedies? Simply because he wrote a song about it, and I only told you about it? 

No,no, no.  Either you really didn't get it or you are being deliberately obtuse and from past experience, you are quite capable of both and possibly at one and the same time so I won't attempt to guess.  All that was said was perhaps his tragedies affected the way he felt about his earlier work because that was also in the PAST.  I don't know where any kind of special treatment comes into the picture here, it would apply to anybody.  A colleague told me about how he found it tough to pass through certain parts of the city that he used to frequent with a girl who broke up with him because it brought back memories he didn't want. I empathised.  Peart is not somehow denied that empathy just because he is an artist.  

I would put it this way.  It is YOU who would rather Neil Peart were some robot or puppet dancing to the wishes of fans because he made the fatal mistake of choosing art as his calling, rather than being true to himself.  
Back to Top
Rednight View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 18 2014
Location: Mar Vista, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 4807
Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2014 at 12:58
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Permanent Waves is their best album so obviously he's drunk.



You're a bit in a sticky wicket and a little around the bend on this one, I'm afraid. I can think of five albums up through Grace Under Pressure that top the goofiness of 'Waves. As for best, well, their fans were gathered by Fly By Night, but the world was delivered with A Farewell To Kings.
Back to Top
TODDLER View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: August 28 2009
Location: Vineland, N.J.
Status: Offline
Points: 3126
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2014 at 11:47
Originally posted by presdoug presdoug wrote:

I always preferred their 70s material, but Neil Peart is entitled to his own perspective on it, even though I don't feel that way about it.
I agree...but that doesn't leave much room for anything elseLOL..I mean to say that Prog musicians are not only judgemental of their own works, but there is the existence of another world..which..is being the musician who lives the life. These people tour, sell records, cross debates in the press, read what has been written by critics, pose as themselves , but become some other distasteful image and they must get over it..otherwise they will destroy themselves from experiencing pain and agony for decades and holding it all inside like a timebomb ready to explode, and just to prove that they can smile and pretend to be an adult too. BUT! ..don't believe it for a minute. They have been abused by the press and being a sensitive musician ..don't believe for a minute that they can get over it like the average working class individual who has a confrontation IN the workplace and decides after a week that it's time to let an issue go and move on. Some musicians have a tendancy to be critical over their early work because it reminds them of a time when they struggled and had dimensional issues.
 
They dislike the time period, what they experienced to arrive there, and are bitter beyond the average inexperienced person or musician who have an interest in this subject matter, but have never payed their dues by living the life itself. The musician who dislikes his past works..dislikes what revolved around it regarding the times they lived in along with their personal sweat and toil which angered them. Some musicians look back on the life of paying their dues and feel that the situation was moronic, insulting, and personally wish it had never occured. So they attempt to pick apart their early works, announce it to a rock journalist and it gets printed. They do this without revealing how they really feel on a complete scale or balance of the experience itself....Because!...they want to be an adult about it and NOT lay "trips" on their fans. They refuse to express their emotions because it defines them as weak. Some musicians are this way and as a result...they will attack the music as their alternative choice.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17068
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2014 at 12:47
Originally posted by Rednight Rednight wrote:

Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Permanent Waves is their best album so obviously he's drunk.



You're a bit in a sticky wicket and a little around the bend on this one, I'm afraid. I can think of five albums up through Grace Under Pressure that top the goofiness of 'Waves. As for best, well, their fans were gathered by Fly By Night, but the world was delivered with A Farewell To Kings.


It's just strange to think of Neil glooming over anything pre-HYF because they had such an incredible run from 78/80 through 85/87 (one can plus or minus as s/he sees fit).
Back to Top
M27Barney View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 09 2006
Location: Swinton M27
Status: Offline
Points: 3136
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2014 at 13:12
Well Neil, I reckon you've got your head firmly up your arse! Rush's OUTPUT CEASED TO BE with Moving Pictures.....
But I suppose that's not an opinion that would be shared by too many, even on this website!
I saw a tribute band belt out 2112 in a tiny pub in Bolton a few months ago - and I can remember Rush doing the same in the late 70's - and that piece alone has more balls and power than EVERY fookin thing they did after 1980....Mind you signals was so sh*t - I haven't even bothered listening to much after that, and when I did I thought it was short track tripe....but hey It's de-rigour to Sl*g off the seventies!
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17068
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2014 at 19:43
Originally posted by M27Barney M27Barney wrote:

Mind you signals was so sh*t


Only if you don't like synthesizers with your guitars & drums (I love 'em)!
Back to Top
Metalmarsh89 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 15 2013
Location: Oregon, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 2673
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2014 at 00:20
I guess Neil Peart and I have different tastes in music. Oh well...
Want to play mafia? Visit here.
Back to Top
Matheusms View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: September 09 2013
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 5
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2014 at 04:26
I think it's strange that Neil is saying something like that given that one of their latest releases (Time Machine) is packed with songs from the records he wishes he could erase (Spirit of the Radio, Freewill, Closer To The Heart, snippets from 2112, Strangiato, Working Man). Of course, if we look at past releases, specially in the live department, there's a ton of examples of old songs being played, sometimes much more than the ones from the records they were touring for at the time. I mean, every band 30++ or 40++ years old play stuff from their early days. Even Gilmour put some oldies in his On An Island tour. But I really think that saying that if you could you would erase these records from existence is something completely out of proportions.

Rush is a nerd band, they'll always be, no matter how many times Dave Grohl call them "cool". Most people are interested in things like Hemispheres and 2112, even though they're sympathetic with nice records like Roll The Bones and Grace Under Pressure. Anyway, like Floyd is Floyd up to The Wall (and I love obsessively The Final Cut), Rush is Rush up to Moving Pictures. There are nice records but what made the band what they are were songs like Freewill, Tom Sawyer, Closer To The Heart, 2112 and so forth. Something like Bravado and, even, Animate, is cool but not even close of being a song that would make 'em the multimillion selling band they become.
Back to Top
M27Barney View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 09 2006
Location: Swinton M27
Status: Offline
Points: 3136
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 07:25
"Nerd Band" - what is the definition of a nerd? and if so then all proggies are by this broad definition a "nerd" - I'm not sure I fit into the category of a "nerd"...
Also what is a "nice" record ???
Back to Top
M27Barney View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 09 2006
Location: Swinton M27
Status: Offline
Points: 3136
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 07:27
If I seem a bit pedantic, I am currently reading some quite heavy philosophical stuff on memetic replication and thus I am in more of an analytical mood than normal!!!
Back to Top
infandous View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 23 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 09:48
Originally posted by Rednight Rednight wrote:

Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Permanent Waves is their best album so obviously he's drunk.



You're a bit in a sticky wicket and a little around the bend on this one, I'm afraid. I can think of five albums up through Grace Under Pressure that top the goofiness of 'Waves. As for best, well, their fans were gathered by Fly By Night, but the world was delivered with A Farewell To Kings.



I would actually agree that Permanent Waves is their finest work.  Our opinions are just as valid as yours.
Back to Top
infandous View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 23 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2447
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 10:00
Originally posted by M27Barney M27Barney wrote:

Well Neil, I reckon you've got your head firmly up your arse! Rush's OUTPUT CEASED TO BE with Moving Pictures.....
But I suppose that's not an opinion that would be shared by too many, even on this website!
I saw a tribute band belt out 2112 in a tiny pub in Bolton a few months ago - and I can remember Rush doing the same in the late 70's - and that piece alone has more balls and power than EVERY fookin thing they did after 1980....Mind you signals was so sh*t - I haven't even bothered listening to much after that, and when I did I thought it was short track tripe....but hey It's de-rigour to Sl*g off the seventies!


Well, I would argue that things started being less interesting after Moving Pictures, but I still like Grace Under Pressure and Power Windows........both of which are prog in my world.  After that though, it was just okay, and finally not very good (until the most recent album, anyway).

In any case, I think we agree that it is more than a little harsh for him to wish the albums before MP out of existence.  He and the band wouldn't have gotten to where they did after that without those albums (whether the individual likes where they went after MP or not......Neal obviously does).  Also, for fans, it IS a bit of a slap in the face if your favorite album is 2112 or Permanent Waves or whatever.  Still, I think it's pretty common for rock artists to Sl*g off their early work.  They are too close to it, and in the case of Rush especially, are always looking to move forward and better their music (again, whether or not you think it got better is not really relevant to the artist).
Back to Top
M27Barney View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 09 2006
Location: Swinton M27
Status: Offline
Points: 3136
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 10:14
I think that Hemispheres is their finest, then Perm W,2112,FTK,MP,COS,FBN,R....
But I haven't really listened to any after Signals...I have far much more stuff to listen to...so no waste of ear-time on electro-pop-rock or whatever genre the later stuff comes under...
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17845
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 12:01
Originally posted by Matheusms Matheusms wrote:

I think it's strange that Neil is saying something like that given that one of their latest releases (Time Machine) is packed with songs from the records he wishes he could erase (Spirit of the Radio, Freewill, Closer To The Heart, snippets from 2112, Strangiato, Working Man). Of course, if we look at past releases, specially in the live department, there's a ton of examples of old songs being played, sometimes much more than the ones from the records they were touring for at the time. I mean, every band 30++ or 40++ years old play stuff from their early days. Even Gilmour put some oldies in his On An Island tour. But I really think that saying that if you could you would erase these records from existence is something completely out of proportions.

Rush is a nerd band, they'll always be, no matter how many times Dave Grohl call them "cool". Most people are interested in things like Hemispheres and 2112, even though they're sympathetic with nice records like Roll The Bones and Grace Under Pressure. Anyway, like Floyd is Floyd up to The Wall (and I love obsessively The Final Cut), Rush is Rush up to Moving Pictures. There are nice records but what made the band what they are were songs like Freewill, Tom Sawyer, Closer To The Heart, 2112 and so forth. Something like Bravado and, even, Animate, is cool but not even close of being a song that would make 'em the multimillion selling band they become.
 
Animate from Counterparts is one of their best selling/posted albums of the 90's. Counterparts is their 15th studio album and charted really high....I just looked it up and it peaked at #2 on Billboard 200, pretty darn good for Rush not being a mainstream band, I assume it went Gold if not Platinum in sales.
The prog masses will ALWAYS sway to the pre-Moving Pictures era, that is an easy assessment to make on this site. Progressive is constant change....right, wrong or indifferent Rush have always been progressing, I believe it is why their fan base is so big and varied.
Back to Top
Metalmarsh89 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 15 2013
Location: Oregon, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 2673
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 14:27
Originally posted by M27Barney M27Barney wrote:

Well Neil, I reckon you've got your head firmly up your arse! Rush's OUTPUT CEASED TO BE with Moving Pictures.....
But I suppose that's not an opinion that would be shared by too many, even on this website!
I saw a tribute band belt out 2112 in a tiny pub in Bolton a few months ago - and I can remember Rush doing the same in the late 70's - and that piece alone has more balls and power than EVERY fookin thing they did after 1980....Mind you signals was so sh*t - I haven't even bothered listening to much after that, and when I did I thought it was short track tripe....but hey It's de-rigour to Sl*g off the seventies!


Sure 2112 was ballsy based on their situation and the time period, but it really wasn't that much different than there previous release Caress of Steel. It was definitely better, but it was still epic, hard rocking music, and still without the fluid transitions between songs (something they seemed to figure out in the next couple albums). And really, the back side is a bunch of "short track tripe" as you put. I personally like their shorter stuff from all over their discography, but I'm just keeping things consistent with your description. If you ever decide to give Presto a listen, that's about as that was a pretty ballsy album. But unlike 2112, they were very well established already, and so their careers were not in jeopardy at all.
Want to play mafia? Visit here.
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 27956
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 15:02
I actually got bored with Rush in the eighties and returned to them when I heard Roll The Bones. Rush were never a prog band like ELP or Yes. They were a heavy rock band with some pretensions. The nineties albums displayed a down to earth and more focused approach. If I want to listen to music with interesting musical ideas I don't go for Rush. If I want something 'harder sounding' and with interesting lyrics then Rush works well for me.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 56789>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.